Santosh Kewat @ Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14159 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2025 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Santosh Kewat @ Santosh Kumar Sahni Son of Rajesh Kewat Residence of Brajesh Nagar, P.S.- Buniyadganj, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Punit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case no.348 of 2025 registered under sections 126(2), 109, 111, 467, 192 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, as a result of land dispute between Ejaj Mainpuri and Parwez Alam, it is stated that 10 named accused persons including the petitioner herein as also 5-7 unknown came and resorted to firing as a result of which two persons were injured. The assault was with the intention of taking possession of the disputed land.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. From the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14159 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/2 contents of the FIR itself, it would transpire that so far as the dispute with respect to the immovable properties is concerned, it is between two others and not the petitioner herein. No specific overt act has been alleged against the petitioner who is in custody since 24.12.2025. He has been falsely implicated in the case because of his antecedent and undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the dispute with respect to the immovable properties being between two other persons and not the petitioner herein, the allegations being general and omnibus in nature and the petitioner having remained in custody since 24.12.2025, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case no.348 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VIII, Gaya.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T